My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01912
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1900-1999
>
pf_01912
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/20/2024 4:49:18 PM
Creation date
2/20/2024 4:37:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1912
Planning Files - Type
Zoning Text Amendment
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
154
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ROSEVILI,E PLANNING COMMISSION Page#11 <br />Wednesday, January 4, 1989 <br />on all sides. Stokes also stated concern about the narrow width <br />of the southeast entrance and the appearance of the south side of <br />the building. <br />Johnson stated her opinion that a lot of information is missing. <br />Johnson added that it is the charge of the Planning Commission to <br />look at all the details of the total development and that it is <br />not unusual for a project of this magnitude to require more than <br />one Planning Commission meeting. <br />Moeller inquired about where ponding would occur in the parking <br />lot. Dahlberg responded that ponding would occur in areas around <br />the periphery and would be 6-8 inches deep for about a half hour <br />duration. <br />Moeller asked why staff was riot requiring a separate ponding <br />area. Keel responded that staff says how much water must be <br />ponded and then the developer determines how it is ponded. <br />Moeller asked what filtering of storm water drainage would occur. <br />Keel replied that they are proposing some filtering in the <br />medians but that he was not convinced that this solution would <br />work. <br />Johnson stated that the City should be prudent about how drainage <br />is handled because of its impact on drainage ditch four. <br />Berry stated concern about drainage, entrances, traffic, trash <br />enclosures and the lack of landscaping along the south side of <br />the project. <br />Goedeke stated that the monument signs are better looking than <br />pylon signs and that a line of pylon signs along Fairview is a <br />problem. <br />Johnson stated that the developer seems to be viewing B2 as the <br />front while the Planning Commission is viewing Fairview as the <br />front. Dahlberg stated that the developer does view Fairview as <br />the front because that's where they are locating their pylon <br />signs. <br />Johnson asked where the entrance to the restaurant would be and <br />which restaurant, would be locating there. Dahlberg stated that <br />the restaurant would Chilis and the entrance would on the north <br />end of the buildir:e,-1 _ <br />Dahlberg stated that the engineers of the project are working <br />with Rice Creek and indications are they will approve it. Keel <br />disagreed and stated that Rice Creek does have problems with the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.